• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Tactics Thread

No Kae is just fine. Without him we'd have been in trouble. Scored both goals ffs. On another day with the same setup we could have bagged 3-4. I think Paratici and Conte both think we could do with one more player with pace to make our counters more potent, but we're still doing fine with our front 3. Their stats are world-leading.
Agree that without him we would be in trouble. However it does not mean we should not try to do better.

Against West Ham he was much the same. Slow, sluggish and scuffed a volley.

Are you watching Emirates Marketing Project/Haaland or Arsenal/jesus? I think they are going to be the golden Boot contenders this season.

Sent from my SM-S908E using Fapatalk
 
Last edited:
Agree that without him we would be in trouble. However it does not mean we should not try to do better.

Against West Ham he was much the same. Slow, sluggish and scuffed a volley.

Are you watching Emirates Marketing Project/Haaland or Arsenal/jesus? I think they are going to be the golden Boot contenders this season.

Sent from my SM-S908E using Fapatalk

I think barring injury, Haaland won’t have any real rivals. He’ll be too far ahead.
 
No Kae is just fine. Without him we'd have been in trouble. Scored both goals ffs. On another day with the same setup we could have bagged 3-4. I think Paratici and Conte both think we could do with one more player with pace to make our counters more potent, but we're still doing fine with our front 3. Their stats are world-leading.

I don't understand this argument, its not like we wouldn't have another player in there.
They may not be as good as Kane, doesn't mean they won't score, or that someone else wouldn't.
Not denigrating kane, but there are other options, the world does not end if harry kane does not play.
 
I don't understand this argument, its not like we wouldn't have another player in there.
They may not be as good as Kane, doesn't mean they won't score, or that someone else wouldn't.
Not denigrating kane, but there are other options, the world does not end if harry kane does not play.

Your first sentence is correct. As no one was making the argument you outlined :) Is Kane playing okay? Yes. Could we do with more attacking options? Yes. Especially a player who can use pace and dribble to disrupt a defense, ideally playing from RWB, as our starting front 3 have a track record of creating and scoring, with Richarlison waiting in the wings.

But even more worthy of attention is our back 3 CBs and midfield. They need to be a cohesive unit when building attacks. The CBs need to step into midfield. We're not seeing that. The 3 we had last night are decent but not good enough when in possession.
 
Your first sentence is correct. As no one was making the argument you outlined :) Is Kane playing okay? Yes. Could we do with more attacking options? Yes. Especially a player who can use pace and dribble to disrupt a defense, ideally playing from RWB, as our starting front 3 have a track record of creating and scoring, with Richarlison waiting in the wings.

Without him (i assume you mean kane) we would be in trouble.
Your words, are saying no one else could score those goals? Those chances would be missed? None of the goals harry kane has scored this season have been the exceptional goals we know he can score, they have been relatively simple goals that we would expect most decent players to score, Richarlison for instance.
Swop kane out for Richarlison (which i am not advocating for) and i don't think we would be any worse off, i certainly do not think we would be in trouble.
 
Without him (i assume you mean kane) we would be in trouble.
Your words, are saying no one else could score those goals? Those chances would be missed? None of the goals harry kane has scored this season have been the exceptional goals we know he can score, they have been relatively simple goals that we would expect most decent players to score, Richarlison for instance.
Swop kane out for Richarlison (which i am not advocating for) and i don't think we would be any worse off, i certainly do not think we would be in trouble.

Yes without Kane we would be in trouble. Posted after the Forest game, he scored twice.

The greater issues are our CBs, RWB when attacking, and midfield IMO.
 
Lloris
Romero.. Dier.. Davies
Kulu.. Bentancur.. Skipp.. Perisic
Richarlison.. Kane.. Son​

That's the team I'd like to see.
 
I would give Bissouma another game to build on last nights outing. Rest up PEH with one eye on Marsielle midweek.

What i think we'll see :

Lloris
Romero Dier Davies
Royal PEH Bentancur Sessegnon
Kulusevski Kane Son

What i want to see :

Lloris
Romero Dier Davies
Spence Bissouma Bentancur Sessegnon
Kulusevski Kane Richarlson
Would like to see Lenglet and Skipp get some minutes off the bench as well

*thought this was the Fulham OMT*
 
Last edited:
Need Romero back asap
But if not we can’t start royal and Sanchez again

I think we will see

………… hugo

… Sanchez ….. Dier….. Lenglet

Djed…. Bissouma … PEH…… Perisic

…. Kulu….. Kane …..son
 
View attachment 14485

Simple but effective way to hurt us…. Make us pass the ball to Sanchez and Royal
You will notice that Royals forward passing is none existing too
That really is horrible, but basically what we all knew, Dier to Sanchez and back again for half the game.

It also shows the lack of link up play between Royal and Kulu. Last season Doherty and Kulu seemed to be building up a great understanding. It's strange that it seems to be totally abandoned.
 
That really is horrible, but basically what we all knew, Dier to Sanchez and back again for half the game.

It also shows the lack of link up play between Royal and Kulu. Last season Doherty and Kulu seemed to be building up a great understanding. It's strange that it seems to be totally abandoned.
There will be an argument that royal played in some of our biggest wins..,. But in reality it was off the back of the form that Doherty picked up with Kulu that lifted that side
Royal attack wise does play well where we’re clearly ahead..almost as if he is then willing to risk his runs more. But his attacking passing is still very basic
We have to have both sides effective to suit contes system as he doesn’t have anything coming centrally in this set up
 
View attachment 14485

Simple but effective way to hurt us…. Make us pass the ball to Sanchez and Royal
You will notice that Royals forward passing is none existing too
Agreed. Wow. So clear.

Also, note our front 3 almost never have the ball. The central 2 midfielders have to do 10x the defending and 10x the possession, almost as though central midfield is a more important area to bolster than some peripheral position.

If you take a step back, it looks like we played a 2431 with Dier and Sanchez at centre back.
Royal and Davies as wide players flanking Hoj/Bissouma.
Then Perisic Kane Kulu as a 3 behind Son.
 
Agreed. Wow. So clear.

Also, note our front 3 almost never have the ball. The central 2 midfielders have to do 10x the defending and 10x the possession, almost as though central midfield is a more important area to bolster than some peripheral position.

If you take a step back, it looks like we played a 2431 with Dier and Sanchez at centre back.
Royal and Davies as wide players flanking Hoj/Bissouma.
Then Perisic Kane Kulu as a 3 behind Son.
I think the system is meant to be (when attacking) 1 CB with 1 midfielder in front flanked by the 2 wide centre backs
The other CM fills the gap in front of his partner and basically 5 in attack (WBs flanking the forwards)
Look at our goal and it was those 5 in the in the area
 
I think the system is meant to be (when attacking) 1 CB with 1 midfielder in front flanked by the 2 wide centre backs
The other CM fills the gap in front of his partner and basically 5 in attack (WBs flanking the forwards)
Look at our goal and it was those 5 in the in the area
I'm not sure if this is the same as your saying...?

Conte always wants a square of 4 players defending when we are attacking (as a minimum) . That consists of 2 CHs and the 2CMs. The other CH (always the RCB or LCB) can press on into midfield and beyond to add support as an attacking option. We have seen this but not so much this season (so far). The CM can help in attack, as we have seen with some nice mid range passes from PEH and Bentancur BUT their main remit is to get thru the work of protecting and defending.
The front 3 do what they do and the main aim is to get the WBs doing more attacking than defending, although they 100% have to do their defensive shift, hence slightly exhausting.

So many people at the game get wound up thinking we are getting overrun in midfield and critisice PEH and Bentancur for not doing enough or being good enough. They both get thru a tremendous amount of work and are constantly fire fighting as well as tryin to circulate and progress the ball, often outnumbered by a 3.

We (Conte) choose to do this, it will lead to less control and giving up possession in that area.

BUT we then have an extra man elsewhere. Most teams play with 3,4,5 at the back. We guarantee to have 3 up against that and 5 when the WBs are there. That's where we need to be hard to handle and creating overloads. Tuchel said it 'Tottenham attack with 5'...he set his tactics to defend that risk with a 5 when they didn't have the ball.

Where it looks a bit ropey is we are largely relying on breakdowns and counter attacking, rather than periods of control and dominating. We go thru phases of masterful counter attacking but when we're not at it, there's not much left to enjoy...it's a bit of a grind. But grind it out we do. As Conte said last season 'if it looks not great, just don't lose' ie suffer and get a point.

I feel we are a team that will run into form, that might be because Son picks up, romeroes back, Bissouma and Skipp get up to speed, we discover Spence, Richie becomes super sub etc...so much still to unfold.
 
I'm not sure if this is the same as your saying...?

Conte always wants a square of 4 players defending when we are attacking (as a minimum) . That consists of 2 CHs and the 2CMs. The other CH (always the RCB or LCB) can press on into midfield and beyond to add support as an attacking option. We have seen this but not so much this season (so far). The CM can help in attack, as we have seen with some nice mid range passes from PEH and Bentancur BUT their main remit is to get thru the work of protecting and defending.
The front 3 do what they do and the main aim is to get the WBs doing more attacking than defending, although they 100% have to do their defensive shift, hence slightly exhausting.

So many people at the game get wound up thinking we are getting overrun in midfield and critisice PEH and Bentancur for not doing enough or being good enough. They both get thru a tremendous amount of work and are constantly fire fighting as well as tryin to circulate and progress the ball, often outnumbered by a 3.

We (Conte) choose to do this, it will lead to less control and giving up possession in that area.

BUT we then have an extra man elsewhere. Most teams play with 3,4,5 at the back. We guarantee to have 3 up against that and 5 when the WBs are there. That's where we need to be hard to handle and creating overloads. Tuchel said it 'Tottenham attack with 5'...he set his tactics to defend that risk with a 5 when they didn't have the ball.

Where it looks a bit ropey is we are largely relying on breakdowns and counter attacking, rather than periods of control and dominating. We go thru phases of masterful counter attacking but when we're not at it, there's not much left to enjoy...it's a bit of a grind. But grind it out we do. As Conte said last season 'if it looks not great, just don't lose' ie suffer and get a point.

I feel we are a team that will run into form, that might be because Son picks up, romeroes back, Bissouma and Skipp get up to speed, we discover Spence, Richie becomes super sub etc...so much still to unfold.
I agree with what your saying
I think our attacking strategy is a reverse tree as a coach once called it

Dier is the stem we have 2/3 in front made up of a CB or 2 and a CM or 2 depending where the other CB is
Then we have a man to pick up the lose ball (can be a CM or CB) with 5 options in front

that can’t happen with royal who doesn’t attack
 
I agree with what your saying
I think our attacking strategy is a reverse tree as a coach once called it

Dier is the stem we have 2/3 in front made up of a CB or 2 and a CM or 2 depending where the other CB is
Then we have a man to pick up the lose ball (can be a CM or CB) with 5 options in front

that can’t happen with royal who doesn’t attack
I agree...the Sanchez, Royal axis is a problem...but I think we have all known that...it was never was or going to be a pairing (or individually) up to scratch.
 
Back